Need help on this

[BananaRepublic]

I was asked by my brother to take some maternity shots. They wanted this type of image specifically, and had the bear, so I said ok Ill have a go, thing is Im not sure how best to edit the these now and really I need advice on it.

So what Im looking for is what should I attempt in PS and I guess secondary could I have done better with it in the first place, I accept that the positioning is a little wrong but I normally do tractors.

Appreciate the help
( O ya they do intend printing whatever I come up with so maybe that is a factor )

 

[smoke665]

should I attempt in PS

Why???? IMO it looks pretty good as is. The only negatives I'd give is the rather large watermark, and maybe a tighter crop on the sides, and top.

 

[BananaRepublic]

I wouldn't put in the watermark to finish with just when posting I have a habit of doing it cause pictures have been lifted before from my social media and used without crediting me. its also happened with printed calendars and such.

But anywho I will try the tighter crop out and see

 

[Designer]

I guess secondary could I have done better with it in the first place, Appreciate the help

Needs more separation, particularly with the man and the tree. Way too much blur, IMO. Also, quite dark.

Less blur, more light, separate subjects from background. I think your subjects should be readily recognizable, and a slight blur will work.

 

[tirediron]

I guess secondary could I have done better with it in the first place, Appreciate the help

Needs more separation, particularly with the man and the tree. Way too much blur, IMO. Also, quite dark.

Less blur, more light, separate subjects from background. I think your subjects should be readily recognizable, and a slight blur will work.

Agree! Significantly under-exposed, and unless the bear has blue fur, the WB needs a tweak as well.

 

[smoke665]

I really hate to disagree with my heroes, but isn't the focal point the bear, symbolic of a baby to come, and the couple in the background, merely confirmation of the intent of the shot??? It seems that any attempt to separate the couple from the background would take away from the focal point. Yes I agree the WB might be slightly cool, "unless" the couple is having a boy, then it could actually be a statement.

 

[BananaRepublic]

I guess secondary could I have done better with it in the first place, Appreciate the help

Needs more separation, particularly with the man and the tree. Way too much blur, IMO. Also, quite dark.

Less blur, more light, separate subjects from background. I think your subjects should be readily recognizable, and a slight blur will work.

Agree! Significantly under-exposed, and unless the bear has blue fur, the WB needs a tweak as well.

I went with f2.8 so that accounts for the blur I did think it was a to much afterward but I wasn't sure.

Would you increase the f stop or move the bear or them.
I have not done any edits so far its just a conversion to jpeg

This what they had in mind ( I can't find a link to this I just got it in a text)


Taken from Pinterst
View attachment 139102
Please do not post images to which you do not hold rights. You may post links.

 

[BananaRepublic]

is having a boy, then it could actually be a statement.

I think you can chalk that up to auto WB

 

[tirediron]

I really hate to disagree with my heroes, but isn't the focal point the bear, symbolic of a baby to come, and the couple in the background, merely confirmation of the intent of the shot??? It seems that any attempt to separate the couple from the background would take away from the focal point. Yes I agree the WB might be slightly cool, "unless" the couple is having a boy, then it could actually be a statement.

Fair point on the WB; I hadn't actually considered that, but that could be the case and it could work. As far as the separation however, the concept is fine, but IMO, the execution could be stronger. By that I mean that the degree of blur on the couple should be rather less than on the background. This is a shot that should be done with a very fast lens such as an 85mm 1.4 ( a 200 f2 would be ideal) and by actually doing the guzintas to place the bear and the couple in optimum positions with respect to the background. The couple needs to be OOF for this to work, but less OOF than they are now, and MUCH less OOF than the rest of the background or they will simply become part of it (as they are doing now).

 

[smoke665]

The couple needs to be OOF for this to work, but less OOF than they are now, and MUCH less OOF than the rest of the background or they will simply become part of it (as they are doing now).

I understand now, thanks for the clarification. I can see that separation (difference in OOF) now in the example the OP posted.

 

[Designer]

Would you increase the f stop or move the bear or them.

Easy enough to adjust your aperture.

Just for kicks, get a DOF calculator for your smart phone so you always have it available. Then it's not guesswork. You might want a tape measure too.

 

[BananaRepublic]

I really hate to disagree with my heroes, but isn't the focal point the bear, symbolic of a baby to come, and the couple in the background, merely confirmation of the intent of the shot??? It seems that any attempt to separate the couple from the background would take away from the focal point. Yes I agree the WB might be slightly cool, "unless" the couple is having a boy, then it could actually be a statement.

Fair point on the WB; I hadn't actually considered that, but that could be the case and it could work. As far as the separation however, the concept is fine, but IMO, the execution could be stronger. By that I mean that the degree of blur on the couple should be rather less than on the background. This is a shot that should be done with a very fast lens such as an 85mm 1.4 ( a 200 f2 would be ideal) and by actually doing the guzintas to place the bear and the couple in optimum positions with respect to the background. The couple needs to be OOF for this to work, but less OOF than they are now, and MUCH less OOF than the rest of the background or they will simply become part of it (as they are doing now).

taken at f2.8 at 85mm, yes afterward seeing it the blur is strong but I had gone from a flat level surface to up hill to downhill and I didn't think of moving them in at the point it looked fine in camera. They're happy but I feel I could retake knowing more now.
I had also practised with bigger bear.

 

[Designer]

I had also practised with bigger bear.

Forget the bigger bear. This one is perfect.

 

[BananaRepublic]

If I reshot would I
A) Move them closer
B) Move the bear
C) change my DOF from 2.8 up

 

[tirediron]

If I reshot would I
A) Move them closer
B) Move the bear
C) change my DOF from 2.8 up

If you can reshoot, the first thing to do is find a better background. Unless this location has special meaning for the couple it's less than ideal IMO. There's a of linear detail as well as bright and dark areas. Looks for something that is more homogenous and even; a hedgerow, forest, or even open space. Place the bear where it needs to be based on focal length, aperture, etc. Then, using manual focus (so that focus does not wander), focus on the bear, and have couple stand immediately behind the bear. Hold down your DoF preview and have them walk away slowly and watch them until you get the "right amount" of OOF, ensuring that they are still identifiable, and distinct from the background.. I would also shoot a series, starting at the distance you select, but also several closer and a couple further away.